Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Deepika Devi, wife of Sri Hari Kishore Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sanjeev Kumar Chourasia, son of Late Ram Prasad Chourasia – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 18.03.2024 passed in Civil Misc. No.01 of 2021 arising out of Original Suit No.216 of 2019/Title Suit No.114 of 2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) at Bokaro whereby the petition dated18.02.2021 filed by the plaintiff/respondent No.1 under Order VI, Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed with cost of Rs.1,000/-.
3. Mr. Arpan Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the subject matter of land appertaining to Mouza Tetulia, Khata No.22, Plot No.80 and 81, Anchal Chas, Thana No.13, admeasuring 10 decimals, purchased by the petitioner No.1 who is wife of petitioner No.2 from Indu Shankar Prasad Singh, son of Late Bindeshwari Prasad Verma vide Sale Deed No.11634/10176 on 17.10.2011 which was also mutated in the name of petitioner No.1 in Revenue Record and petitioner No.1 also paying rent to the State Government and after the execution of sale deed the petitio
Amendments to pleadings after trial commencement may be allowed if they do not fundamentally alter the suit's nature or cause prejudice, supporting judicial efficiency and justice.
Amendment of plaint – If amendment is necessary for deciding real controversy between parties and for arriving at a just conclusion, such amendment could be allowed even at a late stage.
Court ruled that procedural amendment requests should be allowed even after the trial begins, provided they clarify existing claims and do not introduce new issues.
A subsequent petition for amendment is barred by res-judicata if a similar petition was previously dismissed without challenge.
The Appellate Court may keep an amendment application in abeyance pending appeal to ensure substantive rights are not jeopardized, allowing for a comprehensive decision post-hearing.
The amendment of a plaint under Order VI Rule 17 is not permissible if it alters the fundamental nature of the suit.
Amendment of plaint – Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell – Proposed amendment which is elaborative in nature, can be allowed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
